On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 05:21:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 2:36 PM Heiko Carstens > <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 02:15:18PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > I did not test the changes at runtime, but I looked at the > > > generated object code, which seems fine here and includes > > > the same conversions as before. > > > > All looks good and seems to work fine. This is a very nice > > simplification of our compat code, even if it adds some dead code to > > the kernel image. > > > > I did some tests and it all looks good. Also the generated code looks > > fine. So, if nothing breaks, this will go upstream with next merge > > window via the s390 tree. > > > > Thanks again for your work! > > Awesome, thanks for testing it so quickly and agreeing to merge it! > > There is a dependency that I now have for my y2038 syscall series > of course, so I'd need to have those patches on top of the s390 series. > > I think we can either have a shared git branch that gets merged both > into your s390 tree and my y2038 tree, or we merge it only through > my tree, with your Ack. > > Does that work for you? I'll discuss this with Martin tomorrow, however I think a shared git branch would be the best solution. I want to get as much testing as possible for this patch set, which means this must also be in the s390 tree.
